Search (190 results, page 1 of 10)

  • × theme_ss:"Datenformate"
  1. Kernernman, V.Y.; Koenig, M.E.D.: USMARC as a standardized format for the Internet hypermedia document control/retrieval/delivery system design (1996) 0.01
    0.014581205 = product of:
      0.06804562 = sum of:
        0.037644558 = weight(_text_:system in 5565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037644558 = score(doc=5565,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.4871716 = fieldWeight in 5565, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5565)
        0.0058474317 = weight(_text_:information in 5565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0058474317 = score(doc=5565,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 5565, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5565)
        0.024553634 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024553634 = score(doc=5565,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.33085006 = fieldWeight in 5565, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5565)
      0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    
    Abstract
    Surveys how the USMARC integrated bibliographic format (UBIF) could be mapped onto an hypermedia document USMARC format (HDUF) to meet the requirements of a hypermedia document control/retrieval/delivery (HDRD) system for the Internet. Explores the characteristics of such a system using an example of the WWW's directory and searching engine Yahoo!. Discusses additional standard specifications for the UBIF's structure, content designation, and data content to map this format into the HDUF that can serve as a proxy for the Net HDRD system
    Imprint
    Medford, NJ : Information Today
  2. Leazer, G.H.: ¬A conceptual schema for the control of bibliographic works (1994) 0.01
    0.011855094 = product of:
      0.055323772 = sum of:
        0.02328653 = weight(_text_:system in 3033) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02328653 = score(doc=3033,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.30135927 = fieldWeight in 3033, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3033)
        0.0072343214 = weight(_text_:information in 3033) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0072343214 = score(doc=3033,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 3033, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3033)
        0.024802918 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3033) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024802918 = score(doc=3033,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.33420905 = fieldWeight in 3033, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3033)
      0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    
    Abstract
    In this paper I describe a conceptual design of a bibliographic retrieval system that enables more thourough control of bibliographic entities. A bibliographic entity has 2 components: the intellectual work and the physical item. Users searching bibliographic retrieval systems generally do not search for a specific item, but are willing to retrieve one of several alternative manifestations of a work. However, contemporary bibliographic retrieval systems are based solely on the descriptions of items. Works are described only implcitly by collocating descriptions of items. This method has resulted in a tool that does not include important descriptive attributes of the work, e.g. information regarding its history, its genre, or its bibliographic relationships. A bibliographic relationship is an association between 2 bibliographic entities. A system evaluation methodology wasused to create a conceptual schema for a bibliographic retrieval system. The model is based upon an analysis of data elements in the USMARC Formats for Bibliographic Data. The conceptual schema describes a database comprising 2 separate files of bibliographic descriptions, one of works and the other of items. Each file consists of individual descriptive surrogates of their respective entities. the specific data content of each file is defined by a data dictionary. Data elements used in the description of bibliographic works reflect the nature of works as intellectual and linguistic objects. The descriptive elements of bibliographic items describe the physical properties of bibliographic entities. Bibliographic relationships constitute the logical strucutre of the database
    Imprint
    Oxford : Learned Information
    Source
    Navigating the networks: Proceedings of the 1994 Mid-year Meeting of the American Society for Information Science, Portland, Oregon, May 21-25, 1994. Ed.: D.L. Andersen et al
  3. Guenther, R.S.: ¬The USMARC Format for Classification Data : development and implementation (1992) 0.01
    0.010293491 = product of:
      0.048036292 = sum of:
        0.021511177 = weight(_text_:system in 2996) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021511177 = score(doc=2996,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.27838376 = fieldWeight in 2996, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2996)
        0.006682779 = weight(_text_:information in 2996) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006682779 = score(doc=2996,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 2996, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2996)
        0.019842334 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2996) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019842334 = score(doc=2996,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 2996, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2996)
      0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    
    Abstract
    This paper discusses the newly developed USMARC Format for Classification Data. It reviews its potential uses within an online system and its development as one of the USMARC standards for representing bibliographic and related information in machine-readable form. It provides a summary of the fields in the format, and considers the prospects for its implementation.
    Theme
    Klassifikationssysteme im Online-Retrieval
  4. Guenther, R.S.: ¬The development and implementation of the USMARC format for classification data (1992) 0.01
    0.010293491 = product of:
      0.048036292 = sum of:
        0.021511177 = weight(_text_:system in 8865) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021511177 = score(doc=8865,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.27838376 = fieldWeight in 8865, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8865)
        0.006682779 = weight(_text_:information in 8865) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006682779 = score(doc=8865,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 8865, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8865)
        0.019842334 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 8865) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019842334 = score(doc=8865,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 8865, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8865)
      0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    
    Abstract
    This paper discusses the newly developed USMARC Format for Classification Data. It reviews its potential uses within an online system and its development as one of the USMARC standards. It provides a summary of the fields in the format and considers the prospects for its implementation. The papaer describes an experiment currently being conducted at the Library of Congress to create USMARC classification records and use a classification database in classifying materials in the social sciences
    Source
    Information technology and libraries. 11(1992) no.2, S.120-131
    Theme
    Klassifikationssysteme im Online-Retrieval
  5. Mueller, C.J.; Whittaker, M.A.: What is this thing called MARC(S)? (1990) 0.01
    0.010293491 = product of:
      0.048036292 = sum of:
        0.021511177 = weight(_text_:system in 3588) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021511177 = score(doc=3588,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.27838376 = fieldWeight in 3588, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3588)
        0.006682779 = weight(_text_:information in 3588) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006682779 = score(doc=3588,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 3588, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3588)
        0.019842334 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3588) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019842334 = score(doc=3588,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 3588, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3588)
      0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    
    Abstract
    Contribution to an issue devoted to serials and reference services. Familiarity with the basic elements of the MARC format and their effect on the display and retrieval of bibliographic data is an essential element of public service in those libraries with MARC-based on-line catalogues. Describes the components of a MARC record. To successfully retrieve the information sought from an on-line catalogue, the catalogue user must know whether it is in an indexed field and, if so, must be familiar with the search strategies required by the system.
  6. Mishra, K.S.: Bibliographic databases and exchange formats (1997) 0.01
    0.009483904 = product of:
      0.04425822 = sum of:
        0.021511177 = weight(_text_:system in 1757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021511177 = score(doc=1757,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.27838376 = fieldWeight in 1757, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1757)
        0.009450877 = weight(_text_:information in 1757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009450877 = score(doc=1757,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 1757, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1757)
        0.0132961655 = product of:
          0.026592331 = sum of:
            0.026592331 = weight(_text_:22 in 1757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.026592331 = score(doc=1757,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.085914485 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02453417 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1757, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1757)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    
    Abstract
    Computers play an important role in the development of bibliographic databases. Exchange formats are needed for the generation and exchange of bibliographic data at different levels: international, national, regional and local. Discusses the formats available at national and international level such as the International Standard Exchange Format (ISO 2709); the various MARC formats and the Common Communication Format (CCF). Work on Indian standards involving the Bureau of Indian Standards, the National Information System for Science and Technology (NISSAT) and other institutions proceeds only slowly
    Source
    DESIDOC bulletin of information technology. 17(1997) no.5, S.17-22
  7. Taylor, M.; Dickmeiss, A.: Delivering MARC/XML records from the Library of Congress catalogue using the open protocols SRW/U and Z39.50 (2005) 0.01
    0.008164991 = product of:
      0.03810329 = sum of:
        0.016133383 = weight(_text_:system in 4350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016133383 = score(doc=4350,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.20878783 = fieldWeight in 4350, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4350)
        0.0070881573 = weight(_text_:information in 4350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0070881573 = score(doc=4350,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 4350, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4350)
        0.014881751 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014881751 = score(doc=4350,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 4350, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4350)
      0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    
    Abstract
    The MARC standard for representing catalogue records and the Z39.50 standard for locating and retrieving them have facilitated interoperability in the library domain for more than a decade. With the increasing ubiquity of XML, these standards are being superseded by MARCXML and MarcXchange for record representation and SRW/U for searching and retrieval. Service providers moving from the older standards to the newer generally need to support both old and new forms during the transition period. YAZ Proxy uses a novel approach to provide SRW/MARCXML access to the Library of Congress catalogue, by translating requests into Z39.50 and querying the older system directly. As a fringe benefit, it also greatly accelerates Z39.50 access.
    Footnote
    Vortrag, World Library and Information Congress: 71th IFLA General Conference and Council "Libraries - A voyage of discovery", August 14th - 18th 2005, Oslo, Norway.
    Series
    121 UNIMARC with Information Technology ; 065-E
  8. UNIMARC and CDS/ISIS : Proceedings of the Workshops held in Budapest, 21.-22. June 1993 and Barcelona, 26. August 1993 (1994) 0.01
    0.0077793975 = product of:
      0.036303855 = sum of:
        0.018822279 = weight(_text_:system in 8779) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018822279 = score(doc=8779,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.2435858 = fieldWeight in 8779, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8779)
        0.0058474317 = weight(_text_:information in 8779) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0058474317 = score(doc=8779,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 8779, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8779)
        0.011634145 = product of:
          0.02326829 = sum of:
            0.02326829 = weight(_text_:22 in 8779) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02326829 = score(doc=8779,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.085914485 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02453417 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 8779, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8779)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    
    Content
    Enthält die Beiträge: CAMPOS, F.: UNIMARC: state of the art on the universal format for international exchange; HOLT, B.: The maintenance of UNIMARC; WILLER, M.: UNIMARC / Authorities format; HOPKINSON, A.: CDS/ISIS as a tool for implementing UNIMARC; BERKE, S. u. M. SIPOS: The comprehensive information system of the National Széchényi Library and the Hungarian MARC format; SHRAIBERG, Y.: Application of the CDS/ISIS software package and UNIMARC format in the automated systems of the Russian National Public Library for Science and Technology and other libraries of the Russian Federation; STOKLASOVA, B.: Exchange formats in the Czech Republic: past, present and future
  9. ISO 25964 Thesauri and interoperability with other vocabularies (2008) 0.01
    0.0072107157 = product of:
      0.033650007 = sum of:
        0.011408024 = weight(_text_:system in 1169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011408024 = score(doc=1169,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.14763528 = fieldWeight in 1169, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1169)
        0.005603681 = weight(_text_:information in 1169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005603681 = score(doc=1169,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.1301088 = fieldWeight in 1169, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1169)
        0.016638303 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016638303 = score(doc=1169,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.22419426 = fieldWeight in 1169, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1169)
      0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    
    Abstract
    T.1: Today's thesauri are mostly electronic tools, having moved on from the paper-based era when thesaurus standards were first developed. They are built and maintained with the support of software and need to integrate with other software, such as search engines and content management systems. Whereas in the past thesauri were designed for information professionals trained in indexing and searching, today there is a demand for vocabularies that untrained users will find to be intuitive. ISO 25964 makes the transition needed for the world of electronic information management. However, part 1 retains the assumption that human intellect is usually involved in the selection of indexing terms and in the selection of search terms. If both the indexer and the searcher are guided to choose the same term for the same concept, then relevant documents will be retrieved. This is the main principle underlying thesaurus design, even though a thesaurus built for human users may also be applied in situations where computers make the choices. Efficient exchange of data is a vital component of thesaurus management and exploitation. Hence the inclusion in this standard of recommendations for exchange formats and protocols. Adoption of these will facilitate interoperability between thesaurus management systems and the other computer applications, such as indexing and retrieval systems, that will utilize the data. Thesauri are typically used in post-coordinate retrieval systems, but may also be applied to hierarchical directories, pre-coordinate indexes and classification systems. Increasingly, thesaurus applications need to mesh with others, such as automatic categorization schemes, free-text search systems, etc. Part 2 of ISO 25964 describes additional types of structured vocabulary and gives recommendations to enable interoperation of the vocabularies at all stages of the information storage and retrieval process.
    T.2: The ability to identify and locate relevant information among vast collections and other resources is a major and pressing challenge today. Several different types of vocabulary are in use for this purpose. Some of the most widely used vocabularies were designed a hundred years ago and have been evolving steadily. A different generation of vocabularies is now emerging, designed to exploit the electronic media more effectively. A good understanding of the previous generation is still essential for effective access to collections indexed with them. An important object of ISO 25964 as a whole is to support data exchange and other forms of interoperability in circumstances in which more than one structured vocabulary is applied within one retrieval system or network. Sometimes one vocabulary has to be mapped to another, and it is important to understand both the potential and the limitations of such mappings. In other systems, a thesaurus is mapped to a classification scheme, or an ontology to a thesaurus. Comprehensive interoperability needs to cover the whole range of vocabulary types, whether young or old. Concepts in different vocabularies are related only in that they have the same or similar meaning. However, the meaning can be found in a number of different aspects within each particular type of structured vocabulary: - within terms or captions selected in different languages; - in the notation assigned indicating a place within a larger hierarchy; - in the definition, scope notes, history notes and other notes that explain the significance of that concept; and - in explicit relationships to other concepts or entities within the same vocabulary. In order to create mappings from one structured vocabulary to another it is first necessary to understand, within the context of each different type of structured vocabulary, the significance and relative importance of each of the different elements in defining the meaning of that particular concept. ISO 25964-1 describes the key characteristics of thesauri along with additional advice on best practice. ISO 25964-2 focuses on other types of vocabulary and does not attempt to cover all aspects of good practice. It concentrates on those aspects which need to be understood if one of the vocabularies is to work effectively alongside one or more of the others. Recognizing that a new standard cannot be applied to some existing vocabularies, this part of ISO 25964 provides informative description alongside the recommendations, the aim of which is to enable users and system developers to interpret and implement the existing vocabularies effectively. The remainder of ISO 25964-2 deals with the principles and practicalities of establishing mappings between vocabularies.
    Issue
    Pt.1: Thesauri for information retrieval - Pt.2: Interoperability with other vocabularies.
  10. McKercher, B.; Chang, P.X.: ¬A comparison of USMARC and UNIMARC for system design (1995) 0.01
    0.0058386656 = product of:
      0.04087066 = sum of:
        0.032601144 = weight(_text_:system in 2627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032601144 = score(doc=2627,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.42190298 = fieldWeight in 2627, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2627)
        0.008269517 = weight(_text_:information in 2627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008269517 = score(doc=2627,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 2627, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2627)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    Provides a background to the development of the MINISIS relational database management system. The new MINISIS will offer a forms-based 4GL application development environment for building an integrated library system at the heart of which will be the catalogue database. Describes the research on the the database structure involving a comparison between USMARC and UNIMARC. Covers the worldwide use of the 2 systems. Discusses differences in field/subfield content designation; differences in field attributes; access points; linking entries, related fields; control information numbers and codes; USMARC format integration and linkage to other languages and holdings information; linkage with other MARC files; and considerations regarding systems design
  11. Chowdhury, G.G.: Record formats for integrated databases : a review and comparison (1996) 0.01
    0.0057177837 = product of:
      0.040024485 = sum of:
        0.01547085 = weight(_text_:information in 7679) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01547085 = score(doc=7679,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.3592092 = fieldWeight in 7679, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7679)
        0.024553634 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 7679) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024553634 = score(doc=7679,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.33085006 = fieldWeight in 7679, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7679)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    Discusses the issues involved in the development of data formats for computerized information retrieval systems. Integrated databases capable of holding both bibliographic and factual information, in a single database structure, are more convenient for searching and retrieval by end users. Several bibliographic formats have been developed and are used for these bibliographic control puposes. Reviews features of 6 major bibliographic formats: USMARC, UKMARC, UNIMARC, CCF, MIBIS and ABNCD are reviewed. Only 2 formats: CCF and ABNCD are capable of holding both bibliographic and factual information and supporting the design of integrated databases. The comparison suggests that, while CCF makes more detailed provision for bibliographic information, ABNCD makes better provision for factual information such as profiles of institutions, information systems, projects and human experts
    Source
    Information development. 12(1996) no.4, S.218-223
  12. Woods, E.W.; IFLA Section on classification and Indexing and Indexing and Information Technology; Joint Working Group on a Classification Format: Requirements for a format of classification data : Final report, July 1996 (1996) 0.01
    0.005683953 = product of:
      0.03978767 = sum of:
        0.0100241685 = weight(_text_:information in 3008) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0100241685 = score(doc=3008,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 3008, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3008)
        0.029763501 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3008) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029763501 = score(doc=3008,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.40105087 = fieldWeight in 3008, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3008)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Theme
    Klassifikationssysteme im Online-Retrieval
  13. Guenther, R.S.: ¬The Library of Congress Classification in the USMARC format (1994) 0.01
    0.0051691886 = product of:
      0.03618432 = sum of:
        0.018822279 = weight(_text_:system in 8864) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018822279 = score(doc=8864,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.2435858 = fieldWeight in 8864, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8864)
        0.017362041 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 8864) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017362041 = score(doc=8864,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 8864, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8864)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    The paper reviews the development of the USMARC Format for Classification Data, a standard for communication of classification data in machine-readable form. It considers the uses for online classification schedules, both for technical services and reference functions and gives an overview of the format specification details of data elements used and of the structure of the records. The paper describes an experiment conducted at the Library of Congress to test the format as well as the development of the classification database encompassing the LCC schedules. Features of the classification system are given. The LoC will complete its conversion of the LCC in mid-1995
    Theme
    Klassifikationssysteme im Online-Retrieval
  14. Guenther, R.S.: Automating the Library of Congress Classification Scheme : implementation of the USMARC format for classification data (1996) 0.01
    0.0051691886 = product of:
      0.03618432 = sum of:
        0.018822279 = weight(_text_:system in 5578) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018822279 = score(doc=5578,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.2435858 = fieldWeight in 5578, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5578)
        0.017362041 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5578) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017362041 = score(doc=5578,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 5578, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5578)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    Potential uses for classification data in machine readable form and reasons for the development of a standard, the USMARC Format for Classification Data, which allows for classification data to interact with other USMARC bibliographic and authority data are discussed. The development, structure, content, and use of the standard is reviewed with implementation decisions for the Library of Congress Classification scheme noted. The author examines the implementation of USMARC classification at LC, the conversion of the schedules, and the functionality of the software being used. Problems in the effort are explored, and enhancements desired for the online classification system are considered.
    Theme
    Klassifikationssysteme im Online-Retrieval
  15. Coyle, K.: Future considerations : the functional library systems record (2004) 0.00
    0.004972478 = product of:
      0.034807343 = sum of:
        0.021511177 = weight(_text_:system in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021511177 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.27838376 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
        0.0132961655 = product of:
          0.026592331 = sum of:
            0.026592331 = weight(_text_:22 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.026592331 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.085914485 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02453417 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    The paper performs a thought experiment on the concept of a record based on the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records and library system functions, and concludes that if we want to develop a functional bibliographic record we need to do it within the context of a flexible, functional library systems record structure. The article suggests a new way to look at the library systems record that would allow libraries to move forward in terms of technology but also in terms of serving library users.
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.166-174
  16. ISO 8459: Bibliographic data element directory : Pt.1: Interloan applications (ISO 8459-1:1988). - Pt.2: Acquisition applications (ISO 8459-2:1992). - Pt.3: Information retrieval applications (ISO 8459-3:1994). - Pt.4: Circulation applications (ISO/CD 8459-4:1996) - Pt.5: Data elements for the exchange of cataloguing and metadata (ISO/DIS 8459-5:2000) (1988-) 0.00
    0.0047366275 = product of:
      0.03315639 = sum of:
        0.008353474 = weight(_text_:information in 4439) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008353474 = score(doc=4439,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 4439, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4439)
        0.024802918 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4439) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024802918 = score(doc=4439,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.33420905 = fieldWeight in 4439, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4439)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
  17. Bales, K.: ¬The USMARC formats and visual materials (1989) 0.00
    0.0047340714 = product of:
      0.0331385 = sum of:
        0.019842334 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2861) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019842334 = score(doc=2861,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 2861, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2861)
        0.0132961655 = product of:
          0.026592331 = sum of:
            0.026592331 = weight(_text_:22 in 2861) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.026592331 = score(doc=2861,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.085914485 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02453417 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2861, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2861)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    Paper presented at a symposium on 'Implementing the Art and Architecture Thesaurus (AAT): Controlled Vocabulary in the Extended MARC format', held at the 1989 Annual Conference of the Art Libraries Society of North America. Describes how changes are effected in MARC and the role of the various groups in the library community that are involved in the implementing these changes. Discusses the expansion of the formats to accomodate cataloguing and retrieval for visual materials. Expanded capabilities for coding visual materials offer greater opportunity for user access.
    Date
    4.12.1995 22:40:20
  18. Gopinath, M.A.: Standardization for resource sharing databases (1995) 0.00
    0.0042379377 = product of:
      0.029665563 = sum of:
        0.016369399 = weight(_text_:information in 4414) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016369399 = score(doc=4414,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.38007212 = fieldWeight in 4414, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4414)
        0.0132961655 = product of:
          0.026592331 = sum of:
            0.026592331 = weight(_text_:22 in 4414) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.026592331 = score(doc=4414,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.085914485 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02453417 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4414, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4414)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    It is helpful and essential to adopt standards for bibliographic information, project description and institutional information which are shareable for access to information resources within a country. Describes a strategy for adopting international standards of bibliographic information exchange for developing a resource sharing facilitation database in India. A list of 22 ISO standards for information processing is included
    Source
    Library science with a slant to documentation and information studies. 32(1995) no.3, S.i-iv
  19. Johnson, B.C.: XML and MARC : which is "right"? (2001) 0.00
    0.003927156 = product of:
      0.02749009 = sum of:
        0.010128049 = weight(_text_:information in 5423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010128049 = score(doc=5423,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.23515764 = fieldWeight in 5423, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5423)
        0.017362041 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017362041 = score(doc=5423,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 5423, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5423)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    This article explores recent discussions about appropriate mark-up conventions for library information intended for use on the World Wide Web. In particular, the question of whether the MARC 21 format will continue to be useful and whether the time is right for a full-fledged conversion effort to XML is explored. The author concludes that the MARC format will be relevant well into the future, and its use will not hamper access to bibliographic information via the web. Early XML exploratory efforts carried out at the Stanford University's Lane Medical Library are reported on. Although these efforts are a promising start, much more consultation and investigation is needed to arrive at broadly acceptable standards for XML library information encoding and retrieval.
  20. Oehlschläger, S.: Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme : Aus der 46. Sitzung am 21. und 22. April 2004 im Bibliotheksservice-Zentrum Baden-Württemberg in Konstanz (2004) 0.00
    0.0038896988 = product of:
      0.018151928 = sum of:
        0.009411139 = weight(_text_:system in 2434) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009411139 = score(doc=2434,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.1217929 = fieldWeight in 2434, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2434)
        0.0029237159 = weight(_text_:information in 2434) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0029237159 = score(doc=2434,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.06788416 = fieldWeight in 2434, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2434)
        0.0058170725 = product of:
          0.011634145 = sum of:
            0.011634145 = weight(_text_:22 in 2434) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.011634145 = score(doc=2434,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.085914485 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02453417 = queryNorm
                0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 2434, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2434)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    
    Content
    "Die verbundübergreifende Fernleihe für Monografien steht kurz vor ihrer flächendeckenden Einführung. Voraussetzung hierfür ist ein funktionierendes Online-Fernleih-System in jedem Verbund. Dies ist prototypisch realisiert. Die Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme geht davon aus, dass ab dem 1. Januar 2005 der Echtbetrieb aufgenommen werden kann und die Leistungen nach der neuen Leihverkehrsordnung abgerechnet werden können. Zur Klärung von Detailfragen trifft sich im Juni die Arbeitsgruppe Verbundübergreifende Fernleihe. Bereits in der letzten Sitzung wurde festgelegt, dass die jeweiligen Bibliotheken über die Festlegung des Leitwegs entscheiden sollen, und die Verbundzentralen nur dann eingreifen werden, wenn Probleme entstehen sollten. Die individuelle Leitwegsteuerung, sowohl innerhalb des Verbundes als auch bei der Festlegung der Reihenfolge der anzugehenden Verbünde hat in einigen Verbünden hohe Priorität. Traditionell gewachsene Beziehungen müssen von den Bestellsystemen abgebildet werden können. Eine lokale Zusammenarbeit wird auch über Verbundgrenzen hinaus möglich sein. Im Hinblick auf die Verrechnung verbundübergreifender Fernleihen haben sich die Verbünde auf einen einheitlichen Verrechnungszeitraum geeinigt. Voraussetzung ist außerdem, dass die Unterhaltsträger die notwendigen Rahmenbedingungen für die Abrechnung schaffen und die neue Leihverkehrsordnung in allen Bundesländern rechtzeitig in Kraft gesetzt wird."
    - Projekt Umstieg auf internationale Formate und Regelwerke (MARC21, AACR2) Das Projekt Umstieg auf internationale Formate und Regelwerke (MARC21, AACR2) stand zum Zeitpunkt der Sitzung der Arbeitsgemeinschaft kurz vor seinem Abschluss. Im Rahmen der Veranstaltung des Standardisierungsausschusses beim 2. Leipziger Kongress für Information und Bibliothek wurden die wesentlichen Projektergebnisse vorgestellt. Aufgrund der vorliegenden Informationen gehen die Mitglieder der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme davon aus, dass das finanzielle Argument bei der anstehenden Entscheidung nicht mehr im Vordergrund stehen kann. Auch wenn davon ausgegangen wird, dass eine klare Umstiegsentscheidung durch den Standardisierungsausschuss derzeit politisch nicht durchsetzbar sei, sehen die Mitglieder der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme die Entwicklung durch die Projektergebnisse positiv. Durch die Diskussion wurden Defizite des deutschen Regelwerks und der Verbundpraxis offen gelegt und verschiedene Neuerungen angestoßen. Zur Verbesserung des Datentausches untereinander sehen die Verbundzentralen unabhängig von einer Entscheidung des Standardisierungsausschusses die Notwendigkeit, ihre Datenbestände zu homogenisieren und Hierarchien abzubauen bzw. die Verknüpfungsstrukturen zu vereinfachen. Auch die Entwicklung der Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) muss in diese Überlegungen einbezogen werden. Die Formate müssen dahingehend entwickelt werden, dass alle relevanten Informationen im Titelsatz transportiert werden können. Es wird eine Konvergenz von Regelwerk und Format angestrebt.

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 143
  • d 37
  • f 6
  • pl 1
  • sp 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 154
  • m 16
  • el 9
  • s 9
  • n 3
  • x 3
  • b 2
  • ? 1
  • l 1
  • More… Less…